On 01/21/2016 06:23 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jan 2016, Flavio Percoco wrote:
- It was mentioned that some folks receive bonuses for landed features
In this thread we've had people recoil in shock at this ^ one...
- Economic impact on companies/market because no new features were
added (?)
...but I have to say it was this ^ one that gave me the most concern.
At the opensource project level I really don't think this should be
something we're actively worrying about. What we should be worrying
about is if OpenStack is any good. Often "good" will include features,
but not all the time.
Let the people doing the selling worry about the market, if they
want. That stuff is, or at least should be, on the other side of a
boundary.
I'm certain that they will worry about the market.
But look at where contributions come from. A glance at stackalytics says
that only 11% of contributors are independent, meaning companies are 89%
of the contributions. Whether we acknowledge it at the project level or
not, features and "the OpenStack market" are going to be a priority for
a some portion of those 89% of contributions.
Those contributors also want openstack to be "good" but they also have
deadlines to meet internally. Having a freeze upstream for stabilization
is going to put downstream development into overdrive, no doubt. That
would be a poor precedent to have set given where the bulk of
contributions come from.
--
Ryan Brown / Senior Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
